a Synod of German and French Bishops at Francford who discussed the Acts pass'd at Nice and condemn'd them And the Acts of this Synod although they were diligently suppressed by the Popes arts yet Eginardus Hincmarus Aventinus Blondus Adon Aymonius and Regino famous Historians tell us That the Bishops of Francford condemn'd the Synod of Nice and commanded it should not be called a General Council and published a Book under the name of the Emperor confuting that unchristian Assembly and not long since this Book and the Acts of Francford were published by Bishop Tillius by which not only the infinite fraud of the Roman Doctors is discover'd but the worship of Images is declar'd against and condemned A while after this Ludovicus the son of Charlemain sent Claudius a famous Preacher to Taurinum in Italy where he preach'd against the worshipping of Images and wrote an excellent book to that purpose Against this book Jonas Bishop of Orleans after the death of Ludovicus and Claudius did write In which he yet durst not assert the worship of them but confuted it out of Origen whose words he thus cites Images are neither to be esteemed by inward affection nor worshipped with outward shew and out of Lactantius these Nothing is to be worshipped that is seen with mortal eyes Let us adore let us worship nothing but the name alone of our only Parent who is to be sought for in the Regions above not here below And to the same purpose he also alleges excellent words out of Fulgentius and S. Hierom and though he would have Images retain'd and therefore was angry at 〈◊〉 who caus'd them to be taken down yet he himself expresly affirms that they ought not to be worshipped and withall adds that though they kept the Images in their Churches for history and ornament yet that in France the worshipping of them was had in great detestation And though it is not to be denied but that in the sequel of Jonas his book he does something prevaricate in this question yet it is evident that in France this Doctrine was not accounted Catholick for almost nine hundred years after Christ and in Germany it was condemned for almost 1200 years as we find in 〈◊〉 WE are not unskill'd in the devices of the Roman Writers and with how much 〈◊〉 they would excuse this whole matter and palliate the crime imputed to them and elude the Scriptures expresly condemning this Superstition But we know also that the arts of Sophistry are not the ways of Salvation And therefore we exhort our people to follow the plain words of Scripture and the express Law of God in the second Commandment and add also the exhortation of S. John Little children keep your selves from Idols To conclude it is impossible but that it must be confessed that the worship of Images was a thing unknown to the primitive Church in the purest times of which they would not allow the making of them as amongst divers others appears in the Writings of Clemens Alexandrinus Tertullian and Origen SECT IX Picturing God the Father and the Holy Trinity a scandalous practice in the Roman Church It is against the Doctrine and practice of the Primitive Church and of the wiser Heathens who had no Images or Pictures of their gods AS an Appendage to this we greatly reprove the custom of the Church of Rome in picturing God the Father and the most holy and undivided Trinity which besides that it ministers infinite scandal to all sober-minded men and gives the new Arrians in Polonia and Anti-Trinitarians great and ridiculous entertainment exposing that sacred Mystery to derision and scandalous contempt It is also which at present we have undertaken particularly to remark against the doctrine and practice of the primitive Catholick Church S. Clemens of Alexandria says that in the Discipline of Moses God was not to be represented in the shape of a Man or of any other thing and that Christians understood themselves to be bound by the same Law we find it expresly taught by Origen Tertullian Eusebius Athanasius S. Hierom S. Austin Theodoret Damascen and the Synod of Constantinople as it is reported in the 6. Action of the second Nicene Council And certainly if there were not a strange spirit of contradiction or superstition or deflexion from the Christian Rule greatly 〈◊〉 in the Church of Rome it were impossible that this practice should be so countenanc'd by them and defended so to no purpose with so much scandal and against the natural reason of mankind and the very Law of Nature it self For the Heathens were sufficiently by the light of Nature taught to abominate all Pictures or Images of God Sed nulla effigies simulacraque nulla Deorum Majestate locum sacro implevere timore They in their earliest ages had no Pictures no Images of their Gods Their Temples were filled with majesty and a sacred fear and the reason is given by Macrobius Antiquity made no Image viz. of God because the supreme God and the mind that is born of him that is his Son the eternal Word as it is beyond the Soul so it is above Nature and therefore it is not lawful that Figments should come thither 〈◊〉 Callistus relating the heresie of the Armenians and Jacobites says they made Images of the Father Son and Holy Ghost quod perquam ab sur dum est Nothing is more absurd than to make Pictures or Images of the Persons of the holy and adorable Trinity And yet they do this in the Church of Rome For in the windows of their Churches even 〈◊〉 Countrey-villages where the danger cannot be denied to be great and the scandal insupportable nay in their books of Devotion in their very Mass-books and breviaries in their Portuises and Manuals they picture the holy Trinity with three noses and four eyes and three faces in a knot to the great dishonour of God and scandal of Christianity it self We add no more for the case is too evidently bad but reprove the error with the words of their own Polydore Virgil Since the world began never was any thing more foolish than to picture God who is present every where SECT X. Setting up the Pope as universal Bishop an Innovation Among the Apostles the first Church-Governours no Prerogative of one over the rest a remarkable testimony of S. Cyprian to prove it Bishops succeeded the Apostles without Superiority of one over another by Christs Law The Pope has invaded their rights and diminished their power many ways Primitivs Fathers make every Bishop to have a share of power not from another Bishop but from Christ and are against one Bishops judging and forcing another Bishop to obedience Popes opposed when they interposed their authority in the affairs of other Churches THE last Instance of Innovations introduc'd in Doctrine and Practice by the Church of Rome that we shall represent is
that of the Popes Universal Bishoprick That is not only that he is Bishop of Bishops superiour to all and every one but that his Bishoprick is a Plenitude of Power and as for other Bishops of his fulness they all receive a part of the Ministery and sollicitude and not only so but that he only is a Bishop by immediate Divine Dispensation and others receive from him whatsoever they have For to this height many of them are come at last Which Doctrine although as it is in sins where the carnal are most full of reproach but the spiritual are of greatest malignity so it happens in this Article For though it be not so scandalous as their Idolatry so ridiculous as their Superstitions so unreasonable as their Doctrine of Transubstantiation so easily reprov'd as their Half Communion and Service in an unknown Tongue yet it is of as dangerous and evil effect and as false and as certainly an Innovation as any thing in their whole Conjugation of Errours WHEN Christ founded his Church he left it in the hands of his Apostles without any prerogative given to one or eminency above the rest save only of priority and orderly precedency which of it self was natural necessary and incident The Apostles govern'd all their Authority was the sanction and their Decrees and Writings were the Laws of the Church They exercis'd a common jurisdiction and divided it according to the needs and emergencies and circumstances of the Church In the Council of Jerusalem S. Peter gave not the decisive sentence but S. James who was the Bishop of that See Christ sent all his Apostles as his Father sent him and therefore he gave to every one of them the whole power which he left behind and to the Bishops congregated at Miletum S. Paul gave them caution to take care of the whole flock of God and affirms to them all that the Holy Ghost had made them Bishops and in the whole New Testament there is no act or sign of superiority or that one Apostle exercised power over another but to them whom Christ sent he in common intrusted the Church of God according to that excellent saying of S. Cyprian The other Apostles are the same that S. Peter was endowed with an equal fellowship of honour and power and they are all shepherds and the slock is one and therefore it ought to be fed by all the Apostles with unanimous consent THIS unity and identity of power without question and interruption did continue and descend to Bishops in the primitive Church in which it was a known doctrine that the Bishops were successors of the Apostles and what was not in the beginning could not be in the descent unless it were innovated and introduc'd by a new authority Christ gave ordinary power to none but the Apostles and the power being to continue for ever in the Church it was to be succeeded to and by the same authority even of Christ it descended to them who were their successors that is to the Bishops as all antiquity does consent and teach Not S. Peter alone but every Apostle and therefore every one who succeeds them in their ordinary power may and must remember the words of S. Paul We are Embassadors or Legates for Christ Christ's Vicars not the Pope's Delegates and so all the Apostles are called in the Preface of the Mass Quos operis tui Vicarios cidem contulisti praeesse Pastores they are Pastors of the Flock and Vicars of Christ and so also they are in express terms called by S. Ambrose and therefore it is a strange usurpation that the Pope arrogates that to himself by Impropriation which is common to him with all the Bishops of Christendom THE consequent of this is that by the law of Christ one Bishop is not superior to another Christ gave the power to all alike he made no Head of the Bishops he gave to none a supremacy of power or universality of jurisdiction But this the Pope hath long challenged and to bring his purposes to pass hath for these Six hundred years by-gone invaded the rights of Bishops and delegated matters of order and jurisdiction to Monks and Friers insomuch that the power of Bishops was greatly diminished at the erecting of the Cluniac and Cistercian Monks about the year ML but about the year MCC it was almost swallowed up by privileges granted to the Begging Friers and there kept by the power of the Pope which power got one 〈◊〉 step more above the Bishops when they got it declared that the Pope is above a Council of Bishops and at last it was 〈◊〉 into a new doctrine by Cajetane who for his prosperous invention was made a Cardinal that all the whole Apostolick or Episcopal power is radical and inherent in the Pope in whom is the fulness of the Ecclesiastical authority and that Bishops receive their portion of it from him and this was first boldly maintain'd in the Council of Trent by the Jesuits and it is now the opinion of their Order but it is also that which the Pope challenges in practice when he pretends to a power over all Bishops and that this power is deriv'd to him from Christ when he calls himself the Universal Bishop and the Vicarial Head of the Church the Churches Monarch he from whom all Ecclesiastical Authority is derived to whose sentence in things Divine every Christian under pain of damnation is bound to be subject NOW this is it which as it is productive of infinite mischiefs so it is an Innovation and an absolute deflexion from the primitive Catholick Doctrine and yet is the great ground-work and foundation of their Church This we shall represent in these following testimonies Pope Eleutherius in an Epistle to the Bishops of France says that Christ committed the Universal Church to the Bishops and S. Ambrose says that the Bishop holdeth the place of Christ and is his substitute But famous are the words of S. Cyprian The Church of Christ is one through the whole world divided by him into many members and the Bishoprick is but one diffused in the agreeing plurality of many Bishops And again To every Pastor a portion of the flock is given which let every one of them rule and govern By which words it is evident that the primitive Church understood no Prelation of one and Subordination of another commanded by Christ or by virtue of their Ordination but only what was for orders sake introduc'd by Princes and consent of Prelates And it was to this purpose very full which was said by Pope Symmachus As it is in the holy Trinity whose power is one and undivided or to use the expression in the Athanasian Creed none is before or after other none is greater or less than another so there is one Bishoprick amongst divers Bishops and therefore why should the Canons of the ancient Bishops be violated by their Successors Now these words being spoken
against the invasion of the rights of the Church of Arles by Anastasius and the question being in the exercise of Jurisdiction and about the institution of Bishops does fully declare that the Bishops of Rome had no superiority by the laws of Christ over any Bishop in the Catholick Church and that his Bishoprick gave no more power to him than Christ gave to the Bishop of the smallest Diocese AND therefore all the Church of God whenever they reckoned the several orders and degrees of Ministery in the Catholick Church reckon the Bishop as the last and supreme beyond whom there is no spiritual power but in Christ. For as the whole Hierarchy ends in Jesus so does every particular one in its own Bishop Beyond the Bishop there is no step till you rest in the great Shepherd and Bishop of souls Under him every Bishop is supreme in spirituals and in all power which to any Bishop is given by Christ. S. Ignatius therefore exhorts that all should obey their Bishop and the Bishop obey Christ as Christ obeyed his Father There are no other intermedial degrees of Divine institution But as Origen teaches The Apostles and they who after them are ordain'd by God that is the Bishops have the supreme place in the Church and the Prophets have the second place The same also is taught by P. Gelasius by S. Hierom and Fulgentius and indeed by all the Fathers who spake any thing in this matter Insomuch that when Bellarmine is in this question press'd out of the book of Nilus by the Authority of the Fathers standing against him he answers Papam Patres non habere in Ecclesiâ sed Filios omnes The Pope acknowledges no Fathers in the Church for they are all his Sons NOW although we suppose this to be greatly sufficient to declare the Doctrine of the primitive Catholick Church concerning the equality of power in all Bishops by Divine right yet the Fathers have also expresly declared themselves that one Bishop is not superiour to another and ought not to judge another or force another to obedience They are the words of S. Cyprian to a Council of Bishops None of us makes himself a Bishop of Bishops or by tyramical power drives his collegues to a necessity of obedience since every Bishop according to the licence of his own liberty and power hath his own choice and cannot be judged by another nor yet himself judge another but let us all expect the judgment of our Lord Jesus Christ who only and alone hath the power of setting us in the Government of his Church and judging of what we do This was spoken and intended against Pope Stephen who did then begin dominari in clero to lord it over God's heritage and to excommunicate his brethren as Demetrius did in the time of the Apostles themselves but they both found their reprovers Demetrius was chastised by Saint John for this usurpation and Stephen by S. Cyprian and this also was approv'd by S. Austin We conclude this particular with the words of S. Gregory Bishop of Rome who because the Patriarch of Constantinople called himself Universal Bishop said It was a proud title prophane sacrilegious and Antichristian and therefore he little thought that his successors in the same See should so fiercely challenge that Antichristian title much less did the then Bishop of Rome in those Ages challenge it as their own peculiar for they had no mind to be or to be esteemed Antichristian Romano pontisici oblatum est sed nullus unquam eorum hoc singularitatis nomen assumpsit His predecessors it seems had been tempted with an offer of that title but none of them ever assumed that name of singularity as being against the law of the Gospel and the Canons of the Church NOW this being a matter of which Christ spake not one word to S. Peter if it be a matter of Faith and Salvation as it is now pretended it is not imaginable he would have been so perfectly silent But though he was silent of any intention to do this yet S. Paul was not silent that Christ did otherwise for he hath set in his Church primùm Apostolos first of all Apostles not first S. Peter and secondarily Apostles but all the Apostles were first It is also evident that S. Peter did not carry himself so as to give the least overture or umbrage to make any one suspect he had any such preheminence but he was as S. Chrysostom truly says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he did all things with the common consent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nothing by special authority or principality and if he had any such it is more than probable that the Apostles who survived him had succeeded him in it rather than the Bishop of Rome and it being certain as the Bishop of Canaries confesses That there is in Scripture no revelation that the Bishop of Rome should succeed Peter in it and we being there told that S. Pet. was at Antioch but never that he was at Rome it being confessed by some of their own parties by Cardinal Cusanus Soto Driedo Canus and Segovius that this succession was not addicted to any particular Church nor that Christs institution of this does any other way appear that it cannot be proved that the Bishop of Rome is Prince of the Church it being also certain that there was no such thing known in the Primitive Church but that the holy Fathers both of Africa and the East did oppose Pope Victor and Pope Stephen when they began to interpose with a presumptive Authority in the affairs of other Churches and that the Bishops of the Church did treat with the Roman Bishop as with a brother not as their superiour and that the General Council held at Chalcedon did give to the Bishops of C. P. equal rights and preeminence with the Bishops of Rome and that the Greek Churches are at this day and have been a long time great opponents of this pretension of the Bishops of Rome and after all this since it is certain that Christ who foreknows all things did also know that there would be great disputes and challenges of this preeminence did indeed suppress it in his Apostles and said not it should be otherwise in succession and did not give any command to his Church to obey the Bishops of Rome as his Vicars more than what he commanded concerning all Bishops it must be certain that it cannot be necessary to salvation to do so but that it is more than probable that he never intended any such thing and that the Bishops of Rome have to the great prejudice of Christendom made a great schism and usurped a title which is not their due and challenged an Authority to which they have no right and have set themselves above others who are their equals and impose an Article of Faith of their own contriving and have made great preparation for
as is to be seen in their Breviaries Missals Hours of our Lady Rosary of our Lady the Latany of our Lady called Litania Mariae the Speculum Rosariorum the Hymns of Saints Portuises and Manuals These only are the instances which amongst many others presently occur Two things only we shall add instead of many more that might be represented THE first is That in a Hymn which they from what reason or Etymology we know not neither are we 〈◊〉 call a Sequence the Council of Constance did invocate the Blessed Virgin in the same manner as Councils did use to invocate the Holy Ghost They call her the Mother of Grace the remedy to the miserable the fountain of mercy and the light of the Church Attributes proper to God and incommunicable they sing her praises and pray to her for graces they sing to her with the heart they call themselves her sons they declare her to be their health and comfort in all doubts and call on her for light from Heaven and trust in her for the destruction of Heresies and the repression of Schisms and for the lasting Confederations of peace THE other thing we tell of is That there is a Psalter of our Lady of great and antient account in the Church of Rome it hath been several times printed at Venice at Paris at Leipsich and the title is The Psalter of the Blessed Virgin compil'd by the Seraphical Doctor S. Bonaventure Bishop of Alba and Presbyter Cardinal of the Holy Church of Rome But of the Book it self the account is soon made for it is nothing but the Psalms of David an hundred and fifty in number are set down alter'd indeed to make as much of it as could be sense so reduc'd In which the name of Lord is left out and that of Lady put in so that whatever David said of God and Christ the same prayers and the same praises they say of the Blessed Virgin Mary and whether all that can be said without intolerable blasphemy we suppose needs not much disputation THE same things but in a less proportion and frequency they say to other Saints O Maria Magdalena Audi vot a laude plena Apud Christum chorum istum Clementer concilia Vt fons summae pietatis Quite lavit à peccatis Servos suos atque tuos Mundet dat â veniâ O Mary Magdalen hear our prayers which are full of praises and most clemently reconcile this company unto Christ That the Fountain of Supreme Piety who cleansed thee from thy sins giving pardon may cleanse us who are his servants and thine These things are too bad already we shall not aggravate them by any further Commentary but apply the premises NOw therefore we desire it may be considered That there are as the effects of Christs death for us three great products which are the rule and measure of our prayers and our confidence 1. Christs merits 2. His Satisfaction 3. His Intercession By these three we come boldly to the Throne of Grace and pray to God through Jesus Christ. But if we pray to God through the Saints too and rely upon their 1. Merit 2. Satisfaction 3. And Intercession Is it not plain that we make them equal with Christ in kind though not in degree For it is 〈◊〉 avowed and practis'd in the Church of Rome to rely upon the Saints Intercession and this intercession to be made valid by the Merits of the Saints We pray thee O S. Jude the Apostle that by thy Merits thou wouldst draw me from the custom of my sins and snatch me from the power of the Devil and advance me to the invisible powers and they say as much to others And for their Satisfactions the treasure of the Church for Indulgences is made up with them and the satisactions of Christ So that there is nothing remaining of the honour due to Christ our Redeemer and our Considence in him but the same in every kind is by the Church of Rome imputed to the Saints And therefore the very being and Oeconomy of Christianity is destroyed by these prayers and the people are not cannot be good Christians in these devotions and what hopes are laid up for them who repent to no purpose and pray with derogation to Christ's honour is a matter of deepest consideration And therefore we desire our charges not to be seduc'd by little tricks and artifices of useless and laborious distinctions and protestations against evidence of fact and with fear and trembling to consider what God said by the Prophet My people have done two great evils they have for saken me fortem vivum the strong and the living God fontem vivum so some copies read it the living fountain and have digged for themselves cisterns that is little phantastick helps that hold no water that give no refreshment or as S. Paul expresses it they worship and invocate the creature 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 besides the Creator so the word properly signifies and so it is us'd by the Apostle in other places And at least let us remember those excellent words of S. Austin Tutius jucundius loquar ad meum Jesum quam ad aliquem sanctorum spirituum Dei I can speak safer and more pleasantly or chearfully to my Lord Jesus than to any of the Saints and Spirits of God For that we have Commandment for this we have none for that we have example in Scriptures for this we have none there are many promises made to that but to this there is none at all and therefore we cannot in faith pray to them or at all rely upon them for helps WHICH Consideration is greatly heightned by that prostitution of Devotion usual in the Church of Rome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to every Upstart to every old and new Saint And although they have a story among themselves That it is ominous for a Pope to Canonize a Saint and he never survives it above a twelve-month as Pietre Mathieu observes in the instances of Clement the IV. and Adrian the VI. yet this hinders not but that they are tempted to do it frequently But concerning the thing it self the best we can say is what Christ said of the Samaritans They worship they know not what Such are S. Fingare S. Anthony of 〈◊〉 S. Christopher Charles Borromaeus Ignatius Loyola Xaverius and many others of whom Cardinal Bessarion complain'd that many of them were such persons whose life he could not approve and such concerning whom they knew nothing but from their Parties and by pretended Revelations made to particular and hypochondriacal persons It is a famous saying of S. Gregory That the bodies of many persons are worshipped on Earth whose souls are tormented in Hell and Augustinus gustinus Triumphus affirms That all who are canonized by the Pope cannot be said to be in Heaven And this matter is beyond dispute for Prateolus tells that Herman the Author of the Heresie of the Fratricelli was
by 〈◊〉 Chevallonius at Paris 1531. there is a very strange deleatur Dele Solus Deus adorandus that God alone is to be worshipped is commanded to be blotted out as being a dangerous Doctrine These instances may serve instead of multitudes which might be brought of their corrupting the witnesses and razing the records of antiquity that the errors and Novelties of the Church of Rome might not be so easily reprov'd Now if the Fathers were not against them what need these arts Why should they use them thus Their own expurgatory indices are infinite testimony against them both that they do so and that they need it But besides these things we have thought it fit to represent in one aspect some of their chief Doctrines of difference from the Church of England and make it evident that they are indeed new and brought into the Church first by way of opinion and afterwards by power and at last by their own authority decreed into Laws and Articles SECT II. The Church has no power to make new Articles The Roman Church has many ready for the stamp Council of Trents new Article against the necessity of Communicating Infants against the Sense of divers Fathers FIRST we allege that this very power of making new Articles is a Novelty and expresly against the Doctrine of the Primitive Church and we prove it first by the words of the Apostle saying If we or an Angel from Heaven shall preach unto you any other Gospel viz. in whole or in part for there is the same reason of them both than that which we have preached let him be Anathema and secondly by the sentence of the Fathers in the third General Council that at Ephesus That it should not be lawful for any Man to publish or compose another Faith or Creed than that which was defin'd by the Nicene Council and that whosoever shall dare to compose or offer any such to any Persons willing to be converted from Paganism Judaism or Heresie if they were Bishops or Clerks they should be depos'd if Lay-men they should be accursed And yet in the Church of Rome Faith and Christianity increase like the Moon Bromyard complain'd of it long since and the mischief encreases daily They have now a new Article of Faith ready for the stamp which may very shortly become necessary to salvation we mean that of the immaculate conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary Whether the Pope be above a Council or no we are not sure whether it be an article of faith amongst them or not It is very near one if it be not Bellarmine would 〈◊〉 have us believe that the Council of Constance approving the Bull of Pope Martin the fifth declar'd for the Pope's Supremacy But John Gerson who was at the Council says that the Council did abate those heights to which flattery had advanc'd the Pope and that before that Council they spoke such great things of the Pope which afterwards moderate Men durst not speak but yet some others spoke them so confidently before it that he that should then have spoken to the contrary would hardly have escap'd the note of Heresie and that these Men continued the same pretensions even after the Council But the Council of Basil decreed for the Council against the Pope and the Council of Lateran under Leo the tenth decreed for the Pope against the Council So that it is cross and pile and whether for a peny when it can be done it is now a known case it shall become an Article of Faith But ofr the present it is a probationary Article and according to Bellarmine's expression is ferè de fide it is almost an Article of Faith they want a little age and then they may go alone But the Council of Trent hath produc'd a strange new Article but it is sine controversiâ credendum it must be believ'd and must not be controverted that although the Ancient Fathers did give the Communion 〈◊〉 Infants yet they did not believe it necessary to Salvation Now this being a matter of fact whether they did or did not believe it every man that reads their writings can be able to inform himself and besides that it is strange that this should be determin'd by a Council and determin'd against evident truth it being notorious that divers of the Fathers did say it is necessary to salvation the decree it self is beyond all bounds of modesty and a strange pretension of Empire over the Christian belief But we proceed to other instances SECT III. The Roman doctrine of Indulgences an Innovation No mention of them in the Canon-Law of Gratian or in P. Lombard What Indulgences the Old Church gave to Penitents What they signifie in the New Roman the value of them disputed but the Merchandise and abuses continue THE Roman Doctrine of Indulgences was the first occasion of the great change and Reformation of the Western Churches begun by the Preachings of Martin Luther and others and besides that it grew to that intolerable abuse that it became a shame to it self and a reproach to Christendom it was also so very an Innovation that their great Antoninus confesses that concerning them we have nothing expresly either in the Scriptures or in the sayings of the Antient Doctors and the same is affirmed by Sylvester Prierias Bishop Fisher of Rochester says that in the beginning of the Church there was no use of Indulgences and that they began after the people were a-while affrighted with the torments of Purgatory and many of the School-men confess that the use of Indulgences began in the time of Pope Alexander the third towards the end of the 12 th Century but Agrippa imputes the beginning of them to Boniface the VIII who liv'd in the Reign of King Edward the first of England 1300 years after Christ. But that in his time the first Jubilee was kept we are assur'd by Crantzius This Pope lived and died with very great infamy and therefore was not likely from himself to transfer much honour and reputation to the new institution But that about this time indulgences began is more than probable much before it is certain they were not For in the whole Canon-Law written by Gratian and in the sentences of Peter Lombard there is nothing spoken of Indulgences Now because they liv'd in the time of Pope Alexander III. if he had introduc'd them and much rather if they had been as antient as S. Gregory as some vainly and weakly pretend from no greater authority than their own Legends it is probable that these great Men writing Bodies of Divinity and Law would have made mention of so considerable a point and so great a part of the Roman Religion as things are now order'd If they had been Doctrines of the Church then as they are now it is certain they must have come under their cognisance and discourses Now lest the Roman Emissaries should deceive any of the good Sons of
the Church we think it fit to acquaint them that in the Primitive Church when the Bishops impos'd severe penances and that they were almost quite perform'd and a great cause of pity intervened or danger of death or an excellent repentance or that the Martyrs interceded the Bishop did sometimes indulge the Penitent and relax some of the remaining parts of his penance and according to the example of S. Paul in the case of the incestuous Corinthian gave them ease lest they should be swallowed up with too much sorrow But the Roman Doctrine of Indulgences is wholly another thing nothing of it but the abused name remains For in the Church of Rome they now pretend that there is an infinite of degrees of Christs merits and satisfaction beyond what is necessary for the salvation of his servants and for fear Christ should not have enough the Saints have a surplusage of merits or at least of satisfactions more than they can spend or themselves do need and out of these the Church hath made her a treasure a kind of poor-mans box and out of this a power to take as much as they list to apply to the poor Souls in Purgatory who because they did not satisfie for their venial sins or perform all their penances which were imposed or which might have been imposed and which were due to be paid to God for the temporal pains reserved upon them after he had forgiven them the guilt of their 〈◊〉 sins are forc'd sadly to roar in pains not inferiour to the pains of hell excepting only that they are not eternal That this is the true state of their Article of Indulgences we appeal to Bellarmine Now concerning their new foundation of Indulgences the first stone of it was laid by Pope 〈◊〉 VI. in his extravagant Vnigenitus de poenitentiis remissionibus A. D. 1350. This constitution was published Fifty years after the first Jubilee and was a new device to bring in customers to Rome at the second Jubilee which was kept in Rome in this Popes time What ends of profit and interest it serv'd we are not much concern'd to enquire but this we know that it had not yet passed into a Catholick Doctrine for it was disputed against by Franciscus de Mayronis and Durandus not long before this extravagant and that it was not rightly form'd to their purposes till the stirs in Germany rais'd upon the occasion of Indulgences made Leo the Tenth set his Clerks on work to study the point and make something of it BUT as to the thing it self it is so wholly new so merely devis'd and forged by themselves so newly created out of nothing from great mistakes of Scripture and dreams of shadows from antiquity that we are to admonish our charges that they cannot reasonably expect many sayings of the Primitive Doctors against them any more than against the new fancies of the Quakers which were born but yesterday That which is not cannot be numbred and that which was not could not be confuted But the perfect silence of antiquity in this whole matter is an abundant demonstration that this new nothing was made in the later laboratories of Rome For as Durandus said the Holy Fathers Ambrose Hilary Hierom Augustine speak nothing of Indulgences And whereas it is said that S. Gregory DC years after Christ gave Indulgences at Rome in the stations Magister Angularis who lived about 200. years since says he never read of any such any where and it is certain there is no such thing in the writings of S. Gregory nor in any history of that age or any other that is Authentick and we could never see any History pretended for it by the Roman writers but a Legend of Ledgerus brought to us the other day by Surius which is so ridiculous and weak that even their own parties dare not avow it as true story and therefore they are fain to make use of Thomas Aquinas upon the Sentences and Altisiodorensis for story and record And it were strange that if this power of giving Indulgences to take off the punishment reserv'd by God after the sin is pardoned were given by Christ to his Church that no one of the antient Doctors should tell any thing of it insomuch that there is no one Writer of Authority and credit not the more antient Doctors we have named nor those who were much later Rupertus Tuitiensis Anselm or S. Bernard ever took notice of it but it was a Doctrine wholly unknown to the Church for about MCC years after Christ and Cardinal Cajetan told Pope Adrian VI. that to him that readeth the Decretals it plainly appears that an indulgence is nothing 〈◊〉 but an absolution from that penance which the Confessor hath imposed and therefore can be nothing of that which is now adays pretended TRUE it is that the Canonical 〈◊〉 were about the time of Burchard lessen'd and alter'd by commutations and the ancient Discipline of the Church in imposing penances was made so loose that the Indulgence was more than the Imposition and began not to be an act of mercy but remisness an absolution without amends It became a trumpet and a levy for the Holy War in Pope Urban the Second's time for he gave a plenary Indulgence and remission of all sins to them that should go and fight against the Saracens and yet no man could tell how much they were the better for these Indulgences for concerning the value of indulgences the complaint is both old and doubtful said Pope Adrian and he cites a famous gloss which tells of four Opinions all Catholick and yet vastly differing in this particular but the Summa Angelica reckons seven Opinions concerning what that penalty is which is taken off by Indulgences No man could then tell and the point was but in the infancy and since that they have made it what they please but it is at last turn'd into a Doctrine and they have devised new propositions as well as they can to make sense of it and yet it is a very strange thing a solution not an absolution it is the distinction of Bellarmine that is the sinner is let to go free without punishment in this world or in the world to come and in the end it grew to be that which Christendom could not suffer a 〈◊〉 of Doctrines without Grounds of Scripture or Catholick Tradition and not only so but they have introduc'd a way of remitting sins that Christ and his Apostles taught not a way destructive of the repentance and remission of sins which was preached in the Name of Jesus it brought into the Church false and fantastick hopes a hope that will make men asham'd a 〈◊〉 that does not glorisie the merits and perfect satisfaction of Christ a doctrine expresly dishonourable to the full and free pardon given us by God through Jesus Christ a practice that supposes a new bunch of Keys given to the Church besides that
by Scotus Ocham Biel Fisher Bishop of Rochester and divers others whom Bellarmine calls most learned and most acute men it was declared that the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is not expressed in the Canon of the Bible that in the Scriptures there is no place so express as without the Churches Declaration to compel us to admit of Transubstantiation and therefore at least it is to be suspected of novelty But further we know it was but a disputable question in the ninth and tenth ages after Christ that it was not pretended to be an Article of faith till the Later an Council in the time of Pope Innocent the Third MCC years and more after Christ that since that pretended determination divers of the chiefest teachers of their own side have been no more satisfied of the ground of it than they were before but still have publickly affirm'd that the Article is not express'd in Scripture particularly Johannes de Bassolis Cardinal Cajetan and Melchior Canus besides those above reckon'd And therefore if it was not express'd in Scripture it will be too clear that they made their Articles of their own heads for they could not declare it to be there if it was not and if it was there but obscurely then it ought to be taught accordingly and at most it could be but a probable doctrine and not certain as an Article of Faith But that we may put it past argument and probability it is certain that as the Doctrine was not taught in Scripture expresly so it was not at all taught as a Catholick Doctrine or an Article of the Faith by the Primitive ages of the Church Now for this we need no proof but the confession and acknowledgment of the greatest Doctors of the Church of Rome Scotus says that before the Lateran Council Transubstantiation was not an Article of Faith as Bellarmine confesses and Henriquez affirms that Scotus says it was not antient insomuch that Bellarmine accuses him of ignorance saying he talk'd at that rate because he had not read the Roman Council under Pope Gregory the VII nor that consent of Fathers which to so little purpose he had heap'd together Rem transubstantiationis Patres ne attigisse quidem said some of the English sesuits in Prison The Fathers have not so much as touch'd or medled with the matter of Transubstantiation and in Peter Lombard's time it was so far from being an Article of Faith or a Catholick Doctrine that they did not know whether it were true or no And after he had collected the sentences of the Fathers in that Article he confess'd He could not tell whether there was any substantial change or no. His words are these If it be inquir'd what kind of conversion it is whether it be formal or substantial or of another kind I am not able to define it Only I know that it is not formal because the same accidents remain the same colour and taste To some it seems to be substantial saying that so the substance is chang'd into the substance that it is done essentially To which the former authorities seem to consent But to this sentence others oppose these things If the substance of bread and wine be substantially converted into the body and blood of Christ then every day some substance is made the body or blood of Christ which before was not the body and to day something is Christ ' s body which yesterday was not and every day Christ ' s body is increased and is made of such matter of which it was not made in the conception These are his words which we have remark'd not only for the arguments sake though it be unanswerable but to give a plain demonstration that in his time this Doctrine was new not the Doctrine of the Church And this was written but about fifty years before it was said to be decreed in the Lateran Council and therefore it made haste in so short time to pass from a disputable opinion to an Article of Faith But even after the Council Durandus as good a Catholick and as famous a Doctor as any was in the Church of Rome publickly maintain'd that even after consecration the very matter of bread remain'd and although he says that by reason of the Authority of the Church it is not to be held yet it is not only possible it should be so but it implies no contradiction that it should be Christs body and yet the matter of bread remain and if this might be admitted it would salve many difficulties which arise from saying that the substance of bread does not remain But here his reason was overcome by authority and he durst not affirm that of which alone 〈◊〉 was able to give as he thought a reasonable account But by this it appears that the opinion was but then in the forge and by all their understanding they could never accord it but still the questions were uncertain according to that old Distich Corpore de Christi lis est de sanguine lis est Déque modo lis est non habitura modum And the opinion was not determined in the Lateran as it is now held at Rome but it is also plain that it is a stranger to antiquity De Transubstantiatione panis in corpus Christi rara est in antiquis scriptoribus mentio said Alphonsus à Castro There is seldom mention made in the antient writers of transubstantiating the bread into Christs body We know the modesty and interest of the man he would not have said it had been seldom if he could have found it in any reasonable degree warranted he might have said and justified it There was no mention at all of this Article in the primitive Church and that it was a mere stranger to Antiquity will not be denyed by any sober person who considers That it was with so much uneasiness entertained even in the corruptest and most degenerous times and argued and unsetled almost 1300 years after Christ. And that it was so will but too evidently appear by that stating and resolution of this question which we find in the Canon Law For Berengarius was by P. Nicolaus commanded to recant his error in these words and to affirm Verum corpus sanguinem Domini nostri Jesu Christi sensualiter non solùm in sacramento sed in veritate manibus sacerdotum tractari frangi fidelium dentibus atteri That the true body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ sensually not only in Sacrament but in truth is handled by the Priests hands and broken and grinded by the teeth of the faithful Now although this was publickly read at Rome before an hundred and fourteen Bishops and by the Pope sent up and down the Churches of Italy France and Germany yet at this day it is renounced by the Church of Rome and unless it be well expounded says the Gloss will lead into a heresie greater
read Arabick of which the people know nothing But Christians never did so till they of Rome resolved to refuse to do benefit to the souls of the people in this instance or to bring them from intolerable ignorance SECT VIII Worship of Images What they call giving them due honour This worship first brought in by Hereticks Opposed by the first Fathers Epiphanius his zeal against it Forbidden by the Council of Eliberis First decreed by the second Council of Nice Condemned by the Synod of Frankford convened by Charles the Great under whose name a Book was published against that Nicene Synod and the worship of Images Against which the Primitive Christians were so prejudic'd that they would not allow Images to be made THE Church of Rome hath to very bad purposes introduc'd and impos'd upon Christendom the worship and veneration of Images kissing them pulling off their hats kneeling falling down and praying before them which they call giving them due honour and veneration What external honour and veneration that is which they call due is express'd by the instances now reckon'd which the Council of Trent in their Decree enumerate and establish What the inward honour and worship is which they intend to them is intimated in the same Decree By the Images they worship Christ and his Saints and therefore by these Images they pass that honour to Christ and his Saints which is their due that is as their Doctors explain it Latria or Divine worship to God and Christ. Hyperdulia or more than service to the Blessed Virgin Mary and service or doulia to other canoniz'd persons So that upon the whole the case is this Whatever worship they give to God and Christ and his Saints they give it first to the image and from the image they pass it unto Christ and Christ's servants And therefore we need not to enquire what actions they suppose to be fit or due For whatsoever is due to God to Christ or his Saints that worship they give to their respective Images all the same in external semblance and ministery as appears in all their great Churches and publick actions and processions and Temples and Festivals and endowments and censings and pilgrimages and prayers and vows made to them NOW besides that these things are so like Idolatry that they can no way be reasonably excused of which we shall in the next Chapter give some account besides that they are too like the religion of the Heathens and so plainly and frequently forbidden in the Old Testament and are so infinitely unlike the simple and wise the natural and holy the pure and the spiritual religion of the Gospel besides that they are so infinite a scandal to the Jews and Turks and reproach Christianity it self amongst all strangers that live in their communion and observe their rites besides that they cannot pretend to be lawful but with the laborious artifices of many Metaphysical notions and distinctions which the people who most need them do least understand and that therefore the people worship them without these distinctions and directly put confidence in them and that it is impossible that ignorant persons who in all Christian countreys make up the biggest number should do otherwise when otherwise they cannot understand it and besides that the thing it self with or without distinctions is a superstitious and forbidden an unlawful and unnatural worship of God who will not be worshipped by an Image we say that besides all this This whole Doctrine and practice is an innovation in the Christian Church not practis'd not endured in the primitive ages but expresly condemned by them and this is our present undertaking to evince THE first notice we find of Images brought into Christian Religion was by Simon Magus indeed that was very Antient but very heretical and abominable but that he brought some in to be worshipped we find in Theodoret and ‖ S. Austin S. Irenaeus tells That the Gnosticks or Carpocratians did make Images and said that the form of Christ as he was in the flesh was made by Pilate and these Images they worshipped as did the Gentiles These things they did but against these things the Christians did zealously and piously declare We have no Image in the world said S. Clemens of Alexandria It is apparently forbidden to us to exercise that deceitful art For it is written Thou shalt not make any similitude of any thing in Heaven above c. And Origen wrote a just Treatise against Celsus in which he not only affirms That Christians did not make or use Images in Religion but that they ought not and were by God forbidden to do so To the same purpose also Lactantius discourses to the Emperor and confutes the pretences and little answers of the Heathen in that manner that he leaves no pretence for Christians under another cover to introduce the like abomination We are not ignorant that those who were converted from Gentilism and those who lov'd to imitate the customs of the Roman Princes and people did soon introduce the Historical use of Images and according to the manner of the world did think it honourable to depict or make Images of those whom they had in great esteem and that this being done by an esteem relying on Religion did by the weakness of men and the importunity of the Tempter quickly pass into inconvenience and superstition yet even in the time of Julian the Emperor S. Cyril denies that the Christians did give veneration and worship to the Image even of the Cross it self which was one of the earliest temptations and S. Epiphanius it is a known story tells that when in the village of Bethel he saw a cloth picture as it were of Christ or some Saint in the Church against the Authority of Scripture He cut it in pieces and advis'd that some poor man should be buried in it affirming that such Pictures are against Religion and unworthy of the Church of Christ. The Epistle was translated into Latin by S. Hierome by which we may guess at his opinion in the question THE Council of Eliberis is very antient and of great fame in which it is expresly forbidden that what is worshipped should be depicted on the walls and that therefore Pictures ought not to be in Churches S. Austin complaining that he knew of many in the Church who were Worshippers of Pictures calls them Superstitious and adds that the Church condemns such customs and strives to correct them and S. Gregory writing to Serenus Bishop of Massilia says he would not have had him to break the Pictures and Images which were there set for an historical use but commends him for prohibiting any one to worship them and enjoyns him still to forbid it But Superstition by degrees creeping in the Worship of Images was decreed in the seventh Synod or the second Nicene But the decrees of this Synod being by Pope Adrian sent to Charles the Great he convocated
Antichrist if he ever get into that Seat or be in already and made it necessary for all of the Roman Communion to believe and obey him in all things SECT XI Other instances of new Doctrines and practices in the Roman Church It is easier to shew where our Religion was before Luther than where theirs was before the Council of Trent Great and Excellent persons have complained heavily of the corrupt State of that Church but without redress The Reformation preferred a New cure before an Old sore THERE are very many more things in which the Church of Rome hath greatly turn'd aside from the Doctrines of Scripture and the practice of the Catholick Apostolick and primitive Church SUCH are these The Invocation of Saints the Insufficiency of Scriptures without Traditions of Faith unto Salvation their absolving sinners before they have by Canonical penances and the fruits of a good life testified their repentance their giving leave to simple Presbyters by Papal dispensation to give Confirmation or chrism selling Masses for Nine-pences Circumgestation of the Eucharist to be ador'd The dangerous Doctrine of the necessity of the Priests intention in collating Sacraments by which device they have put it into the power of the Priest to damn whom he pleases of his own Parish their affirming that the Mass is a proper and propitiatory sacrifice for the quick and the dead private Masses or the Lord's Supper without Communion which is against the doctrine and practice of the Antient Church of Rome it self and contrary to the Tradition of the Apostles if we may believe Pope Calixtus and is also forbidden under pain of Excommunication Peractâ consecratione omnes communicent qui noluerint ecclesiasticis carere liminibus sic autem etiam Apostoli statuerunt sancta Romana tenet Ecclesia When the Consecration is finished let all Communicate that will not be thrust from the bounds of the Church for so the Apostles appointed and so the holy Church of Rome does hold The same also was 〈◊〉 by Pope Soter and Pope Martin in a Council of Bishops and most severely enjoyn'd by the Canons of the Apostles as they are cited in the Canon Law THERE are divers others but we suppose that those Innovations which we have already noted may be 〈◊〉 to verifie this charge of Novelty But we have done this the rather because the Roman Emissaries endeavour to prevail amongst the ignorant and prejudicate by boasting of Antiquity and calling their Religion the Old Religion and the Catholick so insnaring others by ignorant words in which is no truth their Religion as it distinguishes from the Religion of the Church of England and Ireland being neither the Old nor the Catholick Religion but New and superinduc'd by arts known to all who with sincerity and diligence have look'd into their pretences BUT they have taught every Priest that can scarce understand his Breviary of which in Ireland there are but too many and very many of the people to ask where our Religion was before Luther Whereas it appears by the premises that it is much more easie for us to shew our Religion before Luther than for them to shew theirs before Trent And although they can shew too much practice of their Religion in the degenerate ages of the Church yet we can and do clearly shew ours in the purest and first ages and can and do draw lines pointing to the times and places where the several rooms and stories of their Babel was builded and where polished and where furnished BUT when the Keepers of the 〈◊〉 slept and the 〈◊〉 had sown tares and they had choak'd the wheat and almost destroyed it when the world complain'd of the 〈◊〉 errors in the Church and being oppressed by a violent power durst not complain so much as they had cause and when they who had cause to complain were yet themselves very much abused and did not complain in all they might when divers excellent persons S. Bernard Clemangis Grosthead Marsilius Ocham Alvarus Abbat Joachim Petrarch Savanarola Valla Erasmus Mantuan Gerson Ferus Cassander Andreas Fricius Modrevius Hermannus Coloniensis Wasseburgius Archdeacon of Verdun Paulus Langius Staphilus Telesphorus de Cusentiâ Doctor Talheymius Francis Zabarel the Cardinal and Pope Adrian himself with many others not to reckon Wiclef Hus Jerom of Prague the Bohemians and the poor men of Lions whom they call'd 〈◊〉 and confuted with fire and sword when almost all Christian Princes did complain heavily of the corrupt state of the Church and of Religion and no remedy could be had but the very intended remedy made things much worse then it was that divers Christian Kingdoms and particularly the Church of England Tum primùm senio docilis tua saecula Roma Erubuit pudet exacti 〈◊〉 temporis odit Praeteritos foedis cum religionibus annos Being asham'd of the errors superstitions heresies and impieties which had deturpated the face of the Church look'd into the glass of Scripture and pure Antiquity and wash'd away those stains with which time and inadvertency and tyranny had besmear'd her and being thus cleans'd and wash'd is accus'd by the Roman parties of Novelty and condemn'd because she refuses to run into the same excess of riot and de-ordination But we cannot deserve blame who return to our antient and first health by preferring a New cure before an Old sore CHAP. II. The Church of Rome as it is at this day disordered teaches Doctrines and uses Practices which are in themselves or in their true and immediate Consequences direct Impieties and give warranty to a wicked Life SECT 1. Repentance according to the Romish Doctors not of obligation as soon as we sin by Gods Law but only before we die The Church requiring it once a Year at Easter is satisfied with a ritual repentance The Objection answered that this is not the Doctrine of the Church but the Opinion of some private Doctors Contrition with them not available without confession to a Priest but Attrition with it is And one act of Contrition will make all sure OUR First instance is in their Doctrines of Repentance For the Roman Doctors teach that unless it be by accident or in respect of some other obligation a sinner is not bound presently to repent of his sin as soon as he hath committed it Some time or other he must do it and if he take care so to order his affairs that it be not wholly omitted but so that it be done one time or other he is not by the precept or grace of Repentance bound to do more Scotus and his Scholars say that a sinner is bound viz. by the precept of the Church to repent on Holy days especially the great ones But this is thought too severe by Soto and Medina who teach that a sinner is bound to repent but once a year that is against Easter These Doctors indeed do differ concerning the Churches sense which according to the best of them is bad enough
attently reverently and devoutly you must know that Attention or Advertency to your prayers is manifold 1. That you attend to the words so that you speak them not too fast or to begin the next verse of a Psalm before he that recites with you hath done the former verse and this attention is necessary But 2. there is an attention which is by understanding the sense and that is not necessary For if it were very extremely few would do their duty when so very few do at all understand what they say 3. There is an attention relating to the end of prayer that is that he that prays considers that he is present before God and speaks to him and this indeed is very prositable but it is not necessary No not so much So that by this Doctrine no attention is necessary but to attend that the words be all said and said right But even this attention is not necessary that it should be actual but it suffices to be virtual that is that he who says his office intend to do so and do not change his mind although he does not attend And he who does not change his mind that is unless observing himself not to attend he still turn his mind to other things he attends meaning he attends sufficiently and as much as is necessary though indeed speaking naturally and truly he does not attend If any man in the Church of England and Ireland had published such Doctrine as this he should quickly and deservedly have felt the severity of the Ecclesiastical Rod but in Rome it goes for good Catholick Doctrine NOW although upon this account Devotion is it may be good and it is good to attend to the words of our prayer and the sense of them yet that it is not necessary is evidently consequent to this But it is also expresly affirm'd by the same hand There ought to be devotion that our mind be inflam'd with the love of God though if this be wanting without contempt it is no deadly sin Ecclesiae satisfit per opus externum nec aliud jubet saith Reginaldus If ye do the outward work the Church is satisfied neither does she command any thing else Good Doctrine this And it is an excellent Church that commands nothing to him that prays but to say so many words WELL but after all this if Devotion be necessary or not if it be present or not if the mind wander or wander not if you mind what you pray or mind it not there is an easie cure for all this For Pope Leo granted remission of all negligences in their saying their offices and prayers to them who after they have done shall say this prayer To the Holy and Vndivided Trinity To the Humanity of our Lord Jesus Christ crucified To the fruitfulness of the most Blessed and most Glorious Virgin Mary and to the Vniversity of all Saints be Eternal praise honour vertue and glory from every Creature and to us remission of sins for ever and ever Amen Blessed are the bowels of the Virgin Mary which bore the Son of the Eternal God and blessed are the paps which suckled Christ our Lord Pater noster Ave Maria. This prayer to this purpose is set down by Navar and Cardinal Tolet. THIS is the summ of the Doctrine concerning the manner of saying the Divine offices in the Church of Rome in which greater care is taken to obey the Precept of the Church than the Commandments of God For the Precept of hearing Mass is not to intend the words but to be present at the Sacrifice though the words be not so much as heard and they that think the contrary think so without any probable reason saith Tolet. It seems there was not so much as the Authority of one grave Doctor to the contrary for if there had the contrary opinion might have been probable but all agree upon this Doctrine all that are considerable So that between the Church of England and the Church of Rome the difference in this Article is plainly this They pray with their lips we with the heart we pray with the understanding they with the voice we pray and they say prayers We suppose that we do not please God if our hearts be absent they say it is enough if their bodies be present at their greatest solemnity of prayer though they hear nothing that is spoken and understand as little And which of these be the better way of serving God may soon be determin'd if we remember the complaint which God made of the Jews This people draweth near me with their lips but their hearts are far from me But we know that we are commanded to ask in faith which is seated in the understanding and requires the concurrence of the will and holy desires which cannot be at all but in the same degree in which we have a knowledge of what we ask The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man prevails But what our prayers want of this they must needs want of blessing and prosperity And if we lose the benefit of our prayers we lose that great instrumentality by which Christians are receptive of pardon and strengthened in faith and confirm'd in hope and increase in charity and are protected by Providence and are comforted in their sorrows and derive help from God Ye ask and have not because ye ask amiss that is Saint James his rule They that pray not as they ought shall never obtain what they fain would HITHER is to be 〈◊〉 their fond manner of prayer consisting in vain repetitions of Names and little forms of words The Psalter of our Lady is an hundred and fifty Ave Maries and at the end of every tenth they drop in the Lord's Prayer and this with the Creed at the end of the fifty makes a perfect Rosary This indeed is the main entertainment of the peoples Devotion for which cause Mantuan called their Religion Relligionem Quae filo insertis numerat sua murmura baccis A Religion that numbers their murmurs by berries fil'd upon a string This makes up so great a part of their Religion that it may well be taken for one half of its desinition But because so few do understand what they say but all repeat and stick to their numbers it is evident they think to be heard for that For that or nothing for besides that they neither do nor understand And all that we shall now say to it is That our Blessed Saviour reprov'd this way of Devotion in the Practice and Doctrines of the Heathens Very like to which is that which they call the Psalter of Jesus in which are fifteen short Ejaculations as Have mercy on me * Strengthen me * Help me * Comfort me c. and with every one of these the name of Jesus is to be said thirty times that is in all four hundred and fifty times Now we are ignorant how to distinguish this from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
or vain repetition of the Gentiles for they did just so and Christ said they did not do well and that is all that we pretend to know of it They thought to be heard the rather for so doing and if the people of the Roman Church do not think so there is no reason why they should do so But without any further arguing about the business they are not asham'd to own it For the Author of the Preface to the Jesus Psalter printed by Fouler at Antwerp promises to the repetition of that sweet Name Great aid against temptations and a wonderful increase of grace SECT IX They pray to dead Men and Women whom they suppose beatified and invoke them as helpers preservers Guardians Deliverers contrary to the Scriptures An answer to that pretence that they only desire the Saints to pray for them which by many instances is showed to be false What their Divines teach concerning the Blessed Virgin to engage all to have recourse to her An account of the publick prayers to her The Council of Constance invoked her as other Councils did use to invocate the Holy Ghost Of the Lady's Psalter by Bonaventure How derogatory to Christ to rely in praying to God upon the Merits Satisfaction and Intercession of Saints St. Austin's excellent saying Tutius jucundius c. How their devotion is prostituted to new upstart Saints which are of late Canonization BUT this mischief is gone further yet For as Cajetan affirms Prayers ought to be well done Saltem non malè at least not ill But besides that what we have now remark'd is so not well that it is very ill that which follows is directly bad and most intolerable For the Church of Rome in her publick and allowed offices prays to dead men and women who are or whom they suppose to be beatified and these they invocate as Preservers Helpers Guardians Deliverers in their necessity and they expresly call them their Refuge their Guard and Defence their Life and Health Which is so formidable a Devotion that we for them and for our selves too if we should imitate them are to dread the words of Scripture Cursed is the man that trusteth in man We are commanded to call upon God in the time of trouble and it is promised that he will deliver us and we shall glorifie him We find no such command to call upon Saints neither do we know who are Saints excepting a very few and in what present state they are we cannot know nor how our prayers can come to their knowledge and yet if we did know all this it cannot be endured at all that Christians who are commanded to call upon God and upon none else and to make all our prayers through Jesus Christ and never so much as warranted to make our prayers through Saints departed should yet choose Saints for their particular Patrons or at all relie upon them and make prayers 〈◊〉 them in such forms of words which are only sit to be spoken to God prayers which have no testimony command or promise in the Word of God and therefore which cannot be made in faith or prudent hope NEITHER will it be enough to say that they only desire the Saints to pray for them for though that be of it self a matter indifferent if we were sure they do hear us when we pray and that we should not by that means secretly destroy our considence in God or lessen the honour of Christ our Advocate of which because we cannot be sure but much rather the contrary it is not a matter indifferent Yet besides this in the publick Offices of the Church of Rome there are prayers to Saints made with confidence in them with derogation to God's glory and prerogative with diminution to the honour of Christ with words in sound and in all appearance the same with the highest that are usually express'd in our prayers to God and his Christ And this is it we insist upon and reprove as being a direct destruction of our sole confidence in God and too near to blasphemy to be endured in the Devotions of Christians We make our words good by these Allegations 1. WE shall not need here to describe out of their didactical writings what kind of prayers and what causes of confidence they teach towards the Blessed Virgin Mary and all Saints Only we shall recite a few words of Antoninus their great Divine and 〈◊〉 of Florence It is necessary that they to whom she converts her eyes being an Advocate for them shall be justified and saved And whereas it may be objected out of John that the Apostle says If any man sin we have an Advocate with the Father Jesus Christ the Righteous He answers That Christ is not our Advocate alone but a Judge and since the just is scarce secure how shall a sinner go to him as to an Advocate Therefore God hath provided us of an Advocatess who is gentle and sweet in whom nothing that is sharp is to be found And to those words of St. Paul Come boldly to the Throne of Grace He says That Mary is the Throne of Christ in whom he rested to her therefore let us come with boldness that we may obtain mercy and find grace in time of need and adds that Mary is called full of grace because she is the means and cause of Grace by transfusing grace to mankind and many other such dangerous Propositions Of which who please to be further satisfied if he can endure the horror of reading blasphemous sayings he may sind too great abundance in the Mariale of Bernardine which is confirm'd by publick Authority Jacobus Perez de Valentia and in Ferdinand Quirinus de Salazar who affirms That the Virgin Mary by offering up Christ to God the Father was worthy to have after a certain manner that the whole salvation and redemption of mankind should be ascrib'd to her and that this was common to Christ and the blessed Virgin his Mother that she did offer and give the price of our Redemption truly and properly and that she is deservedly call'd the Redeemer the Repairer the Mediator the Author and cause of our salvation Many more horrid blasphemies are in his notes upon that Chapter in his Defence of the Immaculate Conception published with the Privilege of Philip the III. of Spain and by the Authority of his Order But we insist not upon their Doctrines deliver'd by their great Writers though every wise man knows that the Doctrines of their Church are delivered in large and indefinite terms and descend not to minute senses but are left to be explicated by their Writers and are so practis'd and understood by the people and at the worst the former Doctrine of Probability will make it safe enough But we shall produce the publick practice of their Church AND 〈◊〉 it cannot be suppos'd that they intend nothing but to desire their prayers for they rely also on their merits and
any grace of God but wish it were more modestly pretended unless it could be more evidently prov'd Origen condemned this whole procedure of conjuring Devils long since Quaeret aliquis si convenit vel Daemones adjurare Qui aspicit Jesum imperantem Daemonibus sed 〈◊〉 potestatem dantem Discipulis super omnia daemonia ut infirmitates sanarent dicet quoniam non est secundùm Potestatem datam à salvatore adjurare Daemonia Judaicum enim est If any one asks Whether it be fit to adjure Devils He that beholds Jesus commanding over Devils and also giving power to his Disciples over all unclean spirits and to heal diseases will say that to adjure Devils is not according to the power given by our Blessed Saviour For it is a Jewish trick and S. Chrysostom spake soberly and truly We poor Wretches cannot drive away the flies much less Devils BUT then as to the manner of their Conjurations and Exorcisms this we say If these things come from God let them shew their warranty and their books of Precedents If they come not from God they are so like the Inchantments of Balaam the old Heathens and the modern Magicians that their Original is soon discovered BUT yet from what principle it comes that they have made Exorcists an Ecclesiastical Order with special words and instruments of collation and that the words of Ordination giving them power only over possessed Christians Catechumens or Baptized should by them be extended and exercis'd upon all Infants as if they were all possessed by the Devil and not only so but to bewitched Cattel to Mice and Locusts to Milk and Lettice to Houses and Tempests as if their Charms were Prophylactick as well as Therapeutick and could keep as well as drive the Devil out and prevent storms like the old 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of whom Seneca makes mention Of these things we cannot guess at any probable principle except they have deriv'd them from the Jewish Cabala or the Exorcisms which it is said Solomon us'd when he had consented to Idolatry BUT these things are so unlike the wisdom and simplicity the purity and spirituality of Christian devotion are so perfectly of their own devising and wild imaginations are so full of dirty superstitions and ignorant fancies that there are not in the world many things whose sufferance and practice can more destroy the Beauty of Holiness or reproach a Church or Society of Christians SECT XI The Church of Rome invents Sacramentals of her own without a Divine Warrant Such as Holy water Paschal wax Oil Palm-boughs c. Concerning which their Doctrine is that by these the Blood of Christ is applied to us and they not only signifie but produce Spiritual and supernatural effects How the people are abused with Legendary stories of miraculous cures wrought by them And are taught in the Sacraements themselves to rely so much upon their inherent virtue as to take less care of moral and virtuous dispositions TO put our trust and confidence in God only and to use Ministeries of his own appointment and sanctification is so essential a duty owing by us to God that whoever trusts in any thing but God is a breaker of the first Commandment and he that invents instrumental supports of his own head and puts a subordinate ministerial confidence in them usurps the rights of God and does not pursue the interests of true Religion whose very essence and formality is to glorifie God in all his attributes and to do good to man and to advance the honour and Kingdom of Christ. Now how greatly the Church of Rome prevaricates in this great Soul of Religion appears by too evident and notorious demonstration For she hath invented Sacramentals of her own without a Divine warrant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said S. Cyril Concerning the holy and Divine mysteries of Faith or Religion we ought to do nothing by chance or of our own heads nothing without the Authority of the Divine Scriptures But the Church of Rome does otherwise invents things of her own and imputes spiritual effects to these Sacramentals and promises not only temporal blessings and immunities and benedictions but the collation or increment of Spiritual graces and remission of venial sins and alleviation of pains due to mortal sins to them who shall use these Sacramentals Which because God did not institute and did not sanctisie they use them without Faith and rely upon them without a promise and make themselves the fountains of these graces and produce confidences whose last resort is not upon God who neither was the Author nor is an Approver of them OF this nature are Holy Water the Paschal Wax Oyl Palm-boughs Holy Bread not Eucharistical Hats Agnus Dei's Meddals Swords Bells and Roses hallowed upon the Sunday called Laetare Jerusalem such as Pope Pius the second to James the II. of Scotland and Sixtus Quintus to the Prince of Parma Concerning which their Doctrine is this That the blood of Christ is by these applied unto us that they do not only signifie but produce spiritual effects that they blot out venial sins that they drive away Devils that they cure diseases and that though these things do not operate infallibly as do the Sacraments and that God hath made no express Covenant concerning them yet by the devotion of them that use them and the prayers of the Church they do prevail NOW though it be easie to say and it is notoriously true in Theology that the prayers of the Church can never prevail but according to the grace which God hath promis'd and either can only procure a blessing upon natural things in order to their natural effects or else an extraordinary supernatural effect by vertue of a Divine promise and that these things are pretended to work beyond their natural force and yet God hath not promis'd to them a supernatural blessing as themselves confess yet besides the falseness of the Doctrine on which these superstitions do rely it is also as evident that these instrumentalities produce an affiance and confidence in the Creature and estrange mens hearts from the true Religion and trust in God while they think themselves blessed in their own inventions and in digging to themselves Cisterns of their own and leaving the Fountain of Blessing and Eternal Life To this purpose the Roman Priesta abuse the People with Romantick stories out of the Dialogues of S. Gregory and venerable Bede making them believe that S. Fortunatus cur'd a Man's broken thigh with Holy Water and that S. Malachias the Bishop of Down and Connor cur'd a mad-man with the same medicine and that Saint Hilarion cur'd many sick persons with Holy Bread and Oyl which indeed is the most likely of them all as being good food and good medicine and although not so much as a Chicken is now a-days cur'd of the Pip by Holy Water yet upon all occasions they use it and the common people throw it upon Childrens
III. The Church of Rome teaches Doctrines which in many things are destructive of Christian Society in general and of Monarchy in special Both which the Religion of the Church of England and Ireland does by her Doctrines greatly and Christianly support SECT I. Instances of Doctrines taught in the Church of Rome destructive of Societies As Lying and Equivocating especially before a Magistrate to elude his examinations No Contracts Vows Oaths a sufficient security in dealing with them Council of Constance was against keeping Faith with Hereticks and Hus and Hierome of Prague felt the sad effects of it They would have done the same to Luther at Wormes had not the Emperour hindred Of the Popes dispensing with Oaths and Vows and in Contracts of Marriage and Divorces THAT in the Church of Rome it is publickly taught by their greatest Doctors That it is lawful to lye or deceive the question of the Magistrate to conceal their name and to tell a false one to elude all examinations and make them insignificant and toothless cannot be doubted by any man that knows how the English Priests have behav'd themselves in the times of Queen Elizabeth King James and the Blessed Martyr King Charles 1. 〈◊〉 wrote in defence of it and Father Barnes who wrote a Book against Lying and Equivocating was suspected for a Heretick and smarted severely under their hands To him that asks you again for what you have paid him already you may safely say you never had any thing of him meaning so as to owe it him now It is the Doctrine of Emanuel Sà and Sanchez which we understand to be a great lye and a great sin it being at the best a deceiving of the Law that you be not deceived by your Creditor that is a doing evil to prevent one a sin to prevent the losing of your mony IF a man asks his wife if she be an Adulteress though she be yet she may say she is not if in her mind secretly she say not with a purpose to tell you so Cardinal Tolet teaches And if a man swears he will take such a one to his wife being compelled to swear he may secretly mean if hereafter she do please me And if a man swears to a Thief that he will give him Twenty Crowns he may secretly say If I please to do so and then he is not bound And of this Doctrine Vasquez brags as of a rare though new invention saying it is gathered out of St. Austin and Thomas Aquinas who only found out the way of saying nothing in such cases and questions ask'd by Judges but this invention was drawn out by assiduous disputations * He that promises to say an Ave Mary and swears he will or vows to do it yet sins not mortally though he does not do it said the great Navar and others whom he follows * There is yet a further degree of this iniquity not only in words but in real actions it is lawful to deceive or rob your Brother when to do so is necessary for the preservation of your fame For no man is bound to restore stollen goods that is to cease from doing injury with the peril of his credit So Navar and Cardinal Cajetan and Tolet teaches who adds also Hoc multi dicunt quorum sententiam potest quis tutâ conscientiâ sequi Many say the same thing whose Doctrine any man may follow with a safe Conscience Nay to save a man's credit an honest man that is asham'd to beg may steal what is necessary for him says Diana NOW by these Doctrines a man is taught how to be an honest Thief and to keep what he is bound to restore and by these we may not only deceive our Brother but the Law and not the Law only but God also even with an Oath if the matter be but small It never makes God angry with you or puts you out of the state of grace But if the matter be great yet to prevent a great trouble to your self you may conceal a truth by saying that which is false according to the general Doctrine of the late Casuists So that a man is bound to keep truth and honesty when it is for his turn but not if it be to his own hinderance and 〈◊〉 David was not in the right but was something too nice in the resolution of the like case in the fifteenth Psalm Now although we do not affirm that these particulars are the Doctrine of the whole Church of Rome because little things and of this nature never are considered in their publick Articles of Confession yet a man may do these vile things for so we understand them to be and find justifications and warranty and shall not be affirghted with the terrors of damnation nor the imposition of penances he may for all these things be a good Catholick though it may be not a very good Christian. But since these things are affirm'd by so many the opinion is probable and the practice safe saith Cardinal Tolet. BUT we shall instance in things of more publick concern and Catholick Authority No Contracts Leagues Societies Promises Vows or Oaths are a sufficient security to him that deals with one of the Church of Rome if he shall please to make use of that liberty which may and many times is and always can be granted to him For first it is affirmed and was practis'd by a whole Council of Bishops at Constance that Faith is not to be kept with Hereticks and John Hus and Hierom of Prague and Savanarola felt the mischief of violation of publick faith and the same thing was disputed fiercely at Worms in the case of Luther to whom Coesar had given a safe-conduct and very many would have had it to be broken but Coesar was a better Christian than the Ecclesiasticks and their party and more a Gentleman But that no scrupulous Princes may keep their words any more in such cases or think themselves tied to perform their safe-conducts given to Hereticks there is a way found out by a new Catholick Doctrine Becanus shall speak this point instead of the rest There are two distinct Tribunals and the Ecclesiastical is the Superior and therefore if a Secular Prince gives his Subjects a safe-conduct he cannot extend it to the Superior Tribunal nor by any security given hinder the Bishop or the Pope to exercise their jurisdiction And upon the account of this or the like Doctrine the Pope and the other Ecclesiasticks did prevail at Constance for the burning of their Prisoners to whom safe-conduct had been granted But these things are sufficiently known by the complaints of the injur'd persons BUT not only to Hereticks but to our friends also we may break our promises if the Pope give us leave It is a publick and an avowed Doctrine That if a man have taken an Oath of a thing lawful and honest and in his power yet if it hinders him from doing a greater good the Pope
over Subjects The same also is taught by Santarel in his book of Heresie and Schism printed at Rome 1626. BUT the mischief of this Doctrine proceeds a little further CARDINAL Tolet affirms and our Countryman Father Bridgewater commends the saying That when a Prince is Excommunicate before the Denunciation the Subjects are not absolved from their Oath of Allegiance as Cajet an says well yet when it is denounced they are not only absolved from their Obedience but are bound not to obey unless the fear of death or loss of goods excuse them which was the case of the English Catholicks in the time of Henry the VIII And F. Creswel says it is the sentence of all Catholicks that Subjects are bound to expel Heretical Princes if they have strength enough and that to this they are tied by the Commandment of God the most strict tie of Conscience and the extreme danger of their souls Nay even before the sentence is declared though the Subjects are not bound to it yet lawfully they may deny obedience to an Heretical Prince said Gregory de Valentia IT were an endless labour to transcribe the horrible Doctrines which are preached in the Jesuits School to the shaking off the Regal Power of such Princes which are not of the Roman Communion The whole oeconomy of it is well describ'd by Bellarmine who affirms That it does not belong to Monks or other Ecclesiasticks to commit Murthers neither do the Popes use to proceed that way But their manner is first Fatherly to correct Princes then by Ecclesiastical Censures to deprive them of the Communion then to absolve their Subjects from the Oath of Allegeance and to deprive them of their Kingly Dignity And what then The Execution belongs to others This is the way of the Popes thus wisely and moderately to break Kings in pieces WE delight not to aggravate evil things We therefore forbear to set down those horrid things spoken by Sà Mariana Santarèl Carolus Scribanius and some others It is enough that Suarez says An Excommunicate King may with impunity be depos'd or kill'd by any one This is the case of Kings and Princes by the Sentence of the chiefest Roman Doctors And if it be objected that we are commanded to obey Kings not to speak evil of them not to curse them no not in our heart There is a way found out to answer these little things For though the Apostle commands that we should be subject to higher powers and obey Kings and all that are in Authority It is true you must and so you may well enough for all this for the Pope can make that he who is a King shall be no King and then you are disoblig'd so Bellarmine And if after all this there remains any 〈◊〉 of Conscience it ought to be remembred that though even after a Prince is excommunicated it should be of it self a sin to depose or kill the Prince yet if the Pope commands you it is no sin For if the Pope should err by commanding sin or forbidding vertues yet the Church were bound to believe that the vices were good and the vertues evil unless she would sin against her Conscience They are the very words of Bellarmine BUT they add more particulars of the same Bran. The Sons of an Heretical Father are made sui juris that is free from their Fathers power A Catholick Wife is not tied to pay her duty to an Heretical Husband and the Servants are not bound to do service to such Masters These are the Doctrines of their great Azorius and as for Kings he affirms they may be depos'd for Heresie But all this is only in the case of Heretical Princes But what for others EVEN the Roman Catholick Princes are not free from this danger All the World knows what the Pope did to King Chilperick of France He depos'd him and put Pipin in his place and did what he could to have put Albert King of the Romans in the Throne of Philip sirnamed the Fair. They were the Popes of Rome who arm'd the Son against the Father the Emperour Henry IV. and the Son fought against him took him prisoner shav'd him and thrust him into a Monastery where he died with grief and hunger We will not speak of the Emperour Frederick Henry the sixth Emperour the Duke of Savoy against whom he caused Charles the V. and Francis the I. of France to take Arms nor of Francis Dandalus Duke of Venice whom he bound with chains and fed him as Dogs are fed with bones and scraps under his Table Our own Henry the II. and King John were great Instances of what Princes in their case may expect from that Religion These were the piety of the Father of Christendom But these were the product of the Doctrine which Clement the V. vented in the Council of Vienna Omne jus Regum à se pendere The rights of all Kings depend upon the Pope And therefore 〈◊〉 their Catholick Princes are at their 〈◊〉 and they would if they durst use them 〈◊〉 If they do but favour Hereticks or Schismaticks receive them or defend them if the 〈◊〉 be perjur'd if he rashly break a League made with the See Apostolick 〈◊〉 he do not keep the peace promis'd to the Church if he be sacrilegious if he dissipate the goods of the Church the Pope may depose him said Azorius And 〈◊〉 says he may do it in case the Prince or Emperour be insufficient 〈◊〉 he be wicked if he be unprofitable if he does not defend the Church This is very much but yet there is something more this may be done if he impose new Gabels or Imposts upon his Subjects without the Pope's leave for if they do not pretend to this also why does the Pope in Bulla Coenae Dominici excommunicate all Princes that do it NOW if it be inquired by what Authority the Pope does these things It is answered That the Pope hath a Supreme and Absolute Authority both the Spiritual and the Temporal Power is in the Pope as Christ's Vicar said Azorius and Santarel The Church hath the right of a superiour Lord over the rights of Princes and their Temporalties and that by her Jurisdiction she disposes of Temporals ut de suo peculio as of her own proper goods said our Countreyman Weston Rector of the College at Doway Nay the Pope hath power in omnia per omnia super omnia in all things thorough all things and over all things and the sublimity and immensity of the Supreme Bishop is so great that no mortal man can comprehend it said Cassenaeus no man can express it no man can think it So that it is no wonder what Papirius Massonus said of Pope Boniface the VIII that he owned himself not only as the Lord of France but of all the World NOW we are sure it will be said That this is but the private opinion of some Doctors not the Doctrine
our selves and our infinite distances from God but if love makes you speak speak on so shall your prayers be full of charity and devotion Nullus est amore superior ille te coget ad veniam qui me ad multiloquium Love makes God to be our friend and our approches more united and acceptable and therefore you may say to God the same love which made me speak will also move me to hear and pardon Love and devotion may enlarge your Letanies but nothing else can unless Authority does interpose 6. BE curious not to communicate but with the true Sons of the Church of England lest if you follow them that were amongst us but are gone out from us because they were not of us you be offended and tempted to impute their follies to the Church of England 7. TROUELE your self with no controversies willingly but how you may best please God by a strict and severe conversation 8. IF any Protestant live loosely remember that he dishonours an excellent Religion and that it may be no more laid upon the charge of our Church than the ill lives of most Christians may upon the whole Religion 9. LET no man or woman affright you with declamations and scaring words of Heretick and Damnation and Changeable for these words may be spoken against them that return to light as well as to those that go to darkness and that which men of all sides can say it can be of effect to no side upon its own strength or pretension THE END BOOKS written by J. Taylor D. D. Lord Bishop of Down 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Course of Sermons for all the Sundays of the year together with a discourse of the Divine Institution Necessity Sacredness and Separation of the Office Ministerial in fol. The History of the Life and Death of the Ever-blessed Jesus Christ in fol. the 7. Edit The Rule and Exercises of holy living and dying oct The Golden Grove or a Manual of daily Prayers sitted to the days of the week together with a short Method of Peace and Holiness to which is added a Guide to the Penitent in 12. A Collection of Polemical and Moral discourses in fol. A Discourse of the Nature Offices and Measure of Friendship in 12. Ductor Dubitantium or the Rule of Conscience fol. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Supplement to the ' 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or course of Sermons for the whole year All that have been Preached and Published since the Restauration to which is adjoyned his Advice to the Clergy of his Diocese A Discourse of Confirmation in oct Several Chirurgical Treatises by Richard Wiseman Serjeant-Chirurgeon the Second Edition in fol. The Catholick doctrine of the Eucharist in all Ages in Answer to what Mr. Arnaud Doctor of the Sorborn alledges touching the Belief of the Greek Moscovite Armenian Jacobite Nestorian Coptic Maronite and other Eastern Churches in fol. XXII Sermons preached before His MAJESTY King CHARLES II. at Whitehal by H. Killigrew D. D. and published by the Reverend Dr. Patrick Quarto Winter-Evening Conserence in three parts between Neighbours The third part being newly printed in octavo Animadversions upon a book Intituled Fanaticism Fanatically imputed to the Catholick Church by Dr. Stilling fleet in Vindication of the Church of England by a person of Honour ALL Sold by R. Royston Book seller at the Angel in Amen-Corner 1 〈◊〉 6. 4. Phil. 2. 14. Contra 〈◊〉 De verae fide Moral reg 72. c. 1 reg 80. c. 22. Epist. Pasch. 2. De incarn Christi 〈◊〉 2. cap. de Origen error Lib. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. comperimus de consecr dist 2. in 1 Cor. 11. Eccl. 11. 6. De unit Eccles. c. 6. * Ecclesia ex sacris canonicis Scripturis 〈◊〉 est 〈◊〉 ex illis ostendi non potest Ecclesia non est S. Aug. de uni Eccles. c. 4. c. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ecclesiam ibi decernamus causam nostram * Lib. Candiscip Eccl. Angl. injunct Regin Elis. A. D. 1571 Can. de 〈◊〉 Dat. 3. Calen Mart. 〈◊〉 * Quod sit metrum regula ac scientia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 de Ecclesia l. 2. c. 〈◊〉 ‖ Novum Symbolum condere solum ad Papam spectat quia est caput sidei Christiane cujus authoritate omnia quae ad fidem spectant 〈◊〉 roborantur q. 59. a. 1. art 2. sicut potest novum symbolum condere ita potest novos articulos supra alios multiplicare * Papa potest facere novos articulos fidei id est quod modo credi oporteat cum sic 〈◊〉 non oporteret In cap. cum Christus de 〈◊〉 n. 2. ‖ Papa potest inducere novum articulum 〈◊〉 In idem * Super 2. Decret de jurejur c. nimis n. 1. ‖ Apud Petrum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. instit per. ca. 69. * Jobannes Clemens aliquot folia Theodoretilaceravit abjecit in focum in quibus contra transubstantiationem praeclare disseruit Et cum non it a pridem Originem excuderent totum illud caput sextum Jobannis quod commentabatur Origines omiserunt mutilum ediderunt librum propter candem causam * Sixtus Senensis epist. dedicat ad Pium Quin. laudat 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 verba Expurgari emaculari curasti omnium Catholicorum Scriptorum ac praecipuè veterum 〈◊〉 scripta Index expurgator Madr. 1612. in Indice libror expurgatorum pag. 39. Gal. 1. 8. Part. 2. act 6. c. 7. De potest Eccles. Concil 〈◊〉 De Concil author l 2. c. 17. S. 1. Sess. 21. c. 4. Part. 1. Sum. tit 10. c. 3. In art 18. 〈◊〉 * Intravit ut vulpes regnavit ut leo 〈◊〉 ut canis de eo 〈◊〉 dictum Tertul. 1. ad Martyr c. 1. S. Cyprian lib. 3. Ep. 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 11. Concil Nicen. 1. can 12. Conc. 〈◊〉 c. 5. Concil Laodicen c. 2. S. Basil. in Ep. canonicis habentur in Nomocanone Photii can 73. * Communis opinio D. D. tan Theologorum quam Canonicorum quod sunt ex abundantia meritorum quae ultra mensuram demeritorum suorum sancti sustinuerunt Christi Sum. Angel v. Indulg 9. * Lib. 1. de indulgent c. 2. 3. * In 4. l sen. dist 19 q. 2. ‖ Ib dist 20 q. 3. Vbi supra In lib. 4. sent Verb. Indulgentia Vt quid non praevides tibi in die judicii quando nemo 〈◊〉 per alium excusari vel defendi sed unusquisque sufficiens 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sibi ipsi Tho. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 1. de imit c. 24. * Homil. 1. in ep ad Philom ‖ Serm. de Martyrib Serm. 1. de Advent 〈◊〉 18. 22. * Neque ab iis quos sanas lente languor abscedit sed illico quem restituis ex integro convalescit quia consummatum est quod facis perfectum quod largiris S. Cyprian de coena Domini vel potius Arnoldus P. Gelasius de vincul anathem negat 〈◊〉 deberi 〈◊〉 si culpa corrigatur * 〈◊〉 gratiae finalis peccatum veniale in